Current and former Google execs say the company suffers from both its size and Sundar Pichai's leadership, marked by delayed decisions and raging culture fights
Despite record profits, a number of them are worried that the company is suffering from both its size and leadership from its C.E.O., Sundar Pichai.
The story also sits against concerns that Alphabet’s structure had produced duplicated efforts. Executives now identify company scale and leadership as linked sources of delay and conflict rather than separate management problems.
First-order effects
Google employees and executives face slower decision-making and more internal friction under a leadership model that current and former executives say is not resolving culture disputes.
Pichai’s management is placed under sharper internal scrutiny even as Google’s financial performance remains strong, separating operational concerns from profit results.
Second-order effects
Google’s response to public criticism and antitrust pressure is harder to coordinate when internal decisions are delayed, compounding the leadership challenge described in earlier coverage.
Alphabet’s risk of duplicated work becomes more consequential if disputes and slow approvals prevent its units from aligning around shared priorities.
Third-order effects
If the pattern persists, Google’s scale may turn managerial coordination into a competitive constraint: organizational design and executive decision speed become as important as the company’s underlying businesses.
Sustained culture conflict can shift pressure from product execution toward governance, with leadership legitimacy increasingly tested by employees as well as outside critics.
The trend: Big Tech’s scale is making internal governance, cultural cohesion, and decision velocity central constraints on leadership.
A 140k employee company is somewhat bureaucratic, churns 10% of VPs and has a CEO who shockingly takes time thinking through big decisions. Scandalous. https://www.nytimes.com/...
Is the glass half empty or full? During @sundarpichai 's time as @Google CEO, the workforce has doubled, Alphabet's value has tripled, he is a thoughtful leader and the company is more disciplined and organised. Is that the story? https://www.nytimes.com/...
“During his time leading Google, it has doubled its work force to about 140,000 people, and Alphabet has tripled in value.” LOL he is failing like everyone has been saying Tim Cook has been failing for past 5 years Takes time to make big decisions! https://t.co/ce2CfH8t0V
Yes, a nice guy can absolutely be an effective leader. I have seen @sundarpichai be both for a long time and if you don't want to believe me, look at $GOOG (274.56% up in the past 5 years). https://www.nytimes.com/...
Today's Google is boring and mostly feels like it's chasing trends, not setting them. And I don't think anybody could tell you what Google's current mission really is (beyond making money). That's a leadership problem. https://www.nytimes.com/...
Google is going through it's Ballmer era with Mini-Microsoft style complaints that there are too many employees, no new cash cows, top employees defecting to hotter companies and most recent products have been duds. The company needs a culture change. https://www.nytimes.com/...
It is hard to argue that things aren't going great for Google, @daiwaka writes. But a restive class of Google executives worry that the company is showing cracks - saying Google's work force is increasingly outspoken. https://www.nytimes.com/...
Also the answer to the question of whether a nice guy can be an effective leader is definitely yes since Satya is a super nice person. However he's also ruthlessly pragmatic (e.g. there were annual layoffs his first few years undoing the Nokia purchase) while still being nice.
All roads lead to the age-old Google thing: they are an advertising company with a monopoly no matter how badly they want to be other things too. Sundar's approach seems to suggest he is aware of the reality, which is his fiduciary duty. https://twitter.com/...
“One former executive said the company's risk aversion was embodied by a state of perpetual research and development known internally as “pantry mode.” Teams will stash away products in case a rival creates something new and Google needs to respond quickly.” https://twitter.com/.…
I've yet to hear a former Google exec actually articulate specifically what they want Sundar to do differently besides “move faster” and “be more decisive” https://www.nytimes.com/...
Ok my slightly more serious take: NYT reports that Google 2x'ed headcount and 3x'ed value. Wonder if the value would have gone up 5x if they'd halved the headcount. https://www.nytimes.com/...
Google makes billions every quarter and looks tougher than ever. But some company executives worry it has become slow footed, in part because of the leadership of Sundar Pichai. https://www.nytimes.com/...
it's such a dramatically different company than it was in 2008. a now almost imperceptible moral compass and dominated by timidity https://www.nytimes.com/...
We were JUST talking about how Google appears to be moving in slow motion on the Vergecast last week. This all just feels like what happens when a monopoly is printing cash; no one wants risk new things unless forced https://www.nytimes.com/... https://twitter.com/...
Everyone agrees that Sundar is a thoughtful and caring leader, but some exes said he chews over decisions for too long. A few compared him to Hamlet. With the Google's many workplace culture issues, they see his attempts to lower the temperature as ineffective 2/x
Google arranged for 9 current and former execs to offer a different perspective. They said Sundar is not an autocratic leader and gives his deputies room to make their own decisions. He is also more decisive in private and has taken steps to move some decisions off his plate. 3/x
What if being Big Tech is actually bad for the companies? Great @daiwaka read on fears inside Google that leadership is indecisive and risk averse. (Also, wasn't avoiding all that the point of creating the Alphabet structure?) https://t.co/PSGHNkLvbm
On the surface, things appear great at Google. But there is a growing contingent of current and former execs who see some cracks emerging and they see it as an issue stemming from Sundar Pichai's leadership. Here's our story 1/x https://www.nytimes.com/...
Google weighed buying Shopify, but Sundar shot it down because the price was too high. From good @daiwaka yarn about a Google restless with its CEO. https://www.nytimes.com/...